Information and Knowledge Management using ArcGIS ModelBuilder

Thanos Magoulas, Aida Hadzic, Ted Saarikko and Kalevi Pessi
relational, informative, decisional or innovative in nature (Magoulas and Pessi, 1998). This area
covers activities such as project planning, project management, modelling, architectural design and
simulation.
2.2 Aligning the constitutional parts of an Enterprise Architecture
The concept of alignment has been expressed in several ways. As a result, alignment is treated
synonymously to the following ideas: (1) fit, (2) link, (3) harmony, (4) balance, (5) fusion, (6)
integration, (7) relationship, (8) compatibility and (9) conformity (see for instance Avison et al 2004).
However, within the context of informatics, the concept of alignment is given in terms of harmonious
relationships between two areas of interest in general and the enterprise as a whole in particular. In
the latter case, the alignment is called contextual and we discuss it briefly later on.
A sense of socio-cultural alignment
Whereas goals and objectives usually take the shape of a hierarchy, other aspects like values, norms,
culture et cetera define the conditions under which this hierarchy is formed (Hedberg 1980, Langefors
1975, 1986). The social organization should therefore not limit its concerns to profitability, but must
also promote a favorable environment for the individuals that work towards collective goals (Ackoff
1967, Hedberg 1980).
Socio-cultural alignment is reflected in the harmonious nature of relationships between the areas of
information systems and the areas of goals, objectives and values. The crucial assumption here is
that information and knowledge is the glue that holds business and/or social communities together
(Magoulas and Pessi, 1998). Such alignment can be defined as:
Stakeholders Expectation (Time) = Delivered contributions (Time)
The notion is to determine how shared values, mutual goal-commitments and collaborative behaviour
are addressed within the enterprise. The soundness of the socio-cultural alignment may be expressed
and assessed in terms of cultural feasibility, i.e. shared values and priorities, social feasibility, codetermination,
shared visions, shared goals as well as continuity of mutual commitments.
Furthermore, it is of profound interest to determine the manner in which the organization settles upon
its common goals.
A sense of functional alignment
An enterprise activity may also be described as a process in that it involves a group of activities
organised in such way as to produce a certain product or service. Thus, any form of process
transforms a certain object from a certain state to another desired or expected state (McKenzie 1984).
Processes require resources, tools, skills et cetera, which all require coordination. The need for
coordination may further increase if there are interdependencies among several processes.
Functional alignment is a state of harmonious relationships between the area of information systems
and the area of activities and processes. The fundamental assumption here is that information and
knowledge are critical and in many cases strategic resources (Magoulas and Pessi, 1998). Such an
alignment can be defined in the following manner:
Required information capabilities (Time) = Available information capabilities (Time)
The equation represents the essentials of Galbraith’s (1973, 1977) contingency theory, and
essentially expresses the necessity for the enterprise to satisfy its need for information in a timely
manner.
Any form of informational activity performed by the systems may be seen as a non-separated part of
an enterprise activity. In several approaches, enterprise processes are treated as the "creator" as well
as "user" of information. In other words, while the quality of information systems depends on the
quality of enterprise processes, the quality of enterprise processes depends on the quality of
information systems.
323